Drugging and raping a 13 year old is now just "having sex with a former teen".

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Liberals these days that see nothing wrong with sexy with whomever or who ever. Goes along with their lack or morals about anything and everything.

No black or white...nothing definite...just millions of shades of gray that allow them to do what they want as long as it feels good.

Hollywood dumbasses who want to work with their genius Polanski do not speak for all liberals.

I really don't care about other people's sexual habits, as long as they are not forcing people to have sex with them or having sex with children. Consenting adults is most liberals' standard for sexual ethics.

I'm a liberal, you are a conservative. I'll bet you that despite that, I've practiced a more virtuous sex life than you have lived.

Well there's also Libtard politicians who get standing ovations for diddling House pages too.

The ACLU defending pedo's and NAMBLA.

Shall I continue?

As long as it doesn't interfere with Liberal dogma right?

But this isn't about consenting adults now is it?

I'm a liberal, you are a conservative. I'll bet you that despite that,

No...I don't despise you...just pity you.

Not my fault no one wanted to hook up with you when you were young.[/QUOTE]

1. Even a werewolf is entitled to a legal defense, even those who are accused of horrible crimes. Supporting their right to their day in court with representation is not justification for their crimes. I despise NAMBLA and their agenda, but they still have the right to legal representation.

2. No sex between consenting adults affects me personally unless they are doing it in my eyesight.

3. No one wanted to hook up with me when I was young? Please, women can get sex whenever they want to, even women far uglier and fatter than I have ever been in my life. I have standards, and I wanted to be married first. You know, like the Bible commands. If I had had sex, either now or back when I was young, guys like you would just call me a slut. I don't even have to have sex for conservatives to call me a slut, all I have to do is advocate for women who have health conditions requiring hormonal treatments (i.e. The Pill) for Rush Limbaugh to call me a slut.

Save your pity for someone who needs it, I certainly don't. Nobody beats me, nobody steals my money, and nobody gets to have sex with me unless he's willing to marry me. I have no complaints about my life.

No, but I'm human. I might have trouble holding my temper if the justice failed my kid like it often fails kids.

I'd give them free breathing cessation classes.

Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil.C. S. LewisDo not ever say that the desire to "do good" by force is a good motive. Neither power-lust nor stupidity are good motives. (Are you listening Barry)?:mad:Ayn Rand

What right does NAMBLA have to hold their meetings in Libraries? What civil liberties are there in diddling a kid that the ACLU feel need to be protected?

And you wonder why normal people pity you Liberals.
.

You hardly establish your superiority with comments such as these. I know this is probably pointless and that you'll just keep on saying such things, but surely you can comprehend that the ACLU's mission to protect unpopular speech would necessarily involved defending the most unpopular speech. The ACLU has defended NAMBLA, NAZI's, and a variety of religious and political groups. That doesn't mean that the ACLU is defending "civil liberties in diddling a kid" it means that they defend free speech.

You hardly establish your superiority with comments such as these. I know this is probably pointless and that you'll just keep on saying such things, but surely you can comprehend that the ACLU's mission to protect unpopular speech would necessarily involved defending the most unpopular speech. The ACLU has defended NAMBLA, NAZI's, and a variety of religious and political groups. That doesn't mean that the ACLU is defending "civil liberties in diddling a kid" it means that they defend free speech.

I agree there's a difference between protecting the speech and the practice, but this is one of the reasons why I wouldn't join ACLU. I think there should be limits to freedom of speech. If it harms others, then it shouldn't be done.

Criticism about how the left wants to control what people say in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.

I agree there's a difference between protecting the speech and the practice, but this is one of the reasons why I wouldn't join ACLU. I think there should be limits to freedom of speech. If it harms others, then it shouldn't be done.

So what restrictions would have on speech? What's your legal litmus test for 'harmful speech'?